§

Fleming & Sons, Inc.

147 N.L.R.B. 1271 (N.L.R.B. 1964)
Fleming & Sons, Inc.

9 Cited authorities

  1. Labor Board v. Laughlin

    301 U.S. 1 (1937)   Cited 1,505 times   2 Legal Analyses
    Holding that the National Labor Relations Act applied only to interstate commerce, and upholding its constitutionality on that basis

  2. Pittsburgh Glass Co. v. Board

    313 U.S. 146 (1941)   Cited 294 times
    In Pittsburgh Glass, the Court held that it was not a denial of due process for the Board to refuse to consider evidence relating to the certification issue when petitioner first sought to introduce such evidence at the unfair labor practice hearing.

  3. May Stores Co. v. Labor Board

    326 U.S. 376 (1945)   Cited 257 times
    Requiring "a clear determination by the Board of an attitude of opposition to the purposes of the Act to protect the rights of employees generally"

  4. N.L.R.B. v. Miranda Fuel Co., Inc.

    326 F.2d 172 (2d Cir. 1963)   Cited 98 times

    No. 73, Docket 26232. Argued October 21, 1963. Decided December 11, 1963. Melvin J. Welles, Attorney, National Labor Relations Board, Washington, D.C. (Arnold Ordman, General Counsel, Dominick L. Manoli, Associate General Counsel, Marcel Mallet-Prevost, Asst. General Counsel, and Herman M. Levy, Attorney, National Labor Relations Board, Washington, D.C., on the brief), for petitioner. Samuel J. Cohen, New York City (Jack Last and Cohen Weiss, New York City, on the brief), for respondent Union. Ruth

  5. N.L.R.B. v. Joclin Manufacturing Company

    314 F.2d 627 (2d Cir. 1963)   Cited 50 times
    In NLRB v. Joclin Mfg. Co., 314 F.2d 627, 631-32 (2 Cir. 1963), we recognized that the Board's discretion in determining whether or not to hold a hearing was not unfettered, but we held that it could condition the right to a hearing on the existence of substantial and material issues: "[This] requirement [is] not only proper but necessary to prevent dilatory tactics by employers or unions disappointed in the election returns."

  6. N.L.R.B. v. Superior Fireproof Door Sash Co.

    289 F.2d 713 (2d Cir. 1961)   Cited 32 times
    Holding that "[d]ecertification is a time-consuming endeavor" which is not required to end the duty to bargain; employer may refuse to bargain if it "has reasonable grounds to believe [the union] has lost majority support"

  7. National Labor Relations Bd. v. Jackson Press

    201 F.2d 541 (7th Cir. 1953)   Cited 23 times

    No. 10702. January 29, 1953. David P. Findling, Associate General Counsel, A. Norman Somers, Asst. Gen. Counsel, Louis Schwartz, Attorney, National Labor Relations Board, Washington, D.C., George J. Bott, General Counsel, and Frederick U. Reel, Attorneys, National Labor Relations Board, Washington, D.C., for petitioner. John H. Doesburg, Jr., Chicago, Ill., for respondent. Before DUFFY, FINNEGAN and LINDLEY, Circuit Judges. DUFFY, Circuit Judge. The National Labor Relations Board (hereinafter called

  8. Texarkana Bus Co. v. National Labor Rel. Board

    119 F.2d 480 (8th Cir. 1941)   Cited 20 times

    No. 499, Original. April 30, 1941. On Petition to Review and Set Aside an Order of National Labor Relations Board. Petition by Texarkana Bus Company, Incorporated, and Two States Transportation Company, Incorporated, to review and set aside an order of the National Labor Relations Board. Order modified and affirmed. Ned Stewart, of Texarkana, Ark. (Paul Jones, Jr., of Texarkana, Ark., on the brief), for petitioners. Maurice J. Nicoson, Atty., National Labor Relations Board, of Washington, D.C. (Robert

  9. Nat'l Labor Relations Bd. v. Chronicle Pub. Co.

    230 F.2d 543 (7th Cir. 1956)   Cited 5 times

    No. 11553. March 2, 1956. David P. Findling, Associate General Counsel, Frederick U. Reel, Attorney, N.L.R.B., Washington, D.C., Theophil C. Kammholz, General Counsel, Marcel Mallet-Prevost, Assistant General Counsel, Kalvin Kahn, Attorneys, National Labor Relations Board, Washington, D.C., for petitioner. Frederic D. Anderson, Indianapolis, Ind., George J. Zazas, Indianapolis, Ind., Barnes, Hickam, Pantzer Boyd, Indianapolis, Ind., for respondent. Before MAJOR, LINDLEY and SWAIM, Circuit Judges